It would be foolhardy to argue that the religious conversion debate is a paranoia created by the BJP or other right-wing organisations. This issue might be a politically exploited one but is not a recent creation. A cursory look at India’s history is enough to prove the existence of this perplexing issue before and after independence.
In fact, across the world, the issue of religious conversions has dominated the 19th and 20th centuries. For example, the colonial government of British India enacted various laws to facilitate conversion of Hindus to Islam or Christianity. While it was an offence in England to deny the “truth of Christianity”, you could easily deny the truth of any other religion in India and it would not be an offence.
During colonial times, the missionaries were given easy access and the fault lines of the Hindu community were further deepened to aid religious conversion. The tussle is evident from the statement of Mahatma Gandhi when he said: “If I had power and could legislate, the first thing I would ban is conversions.” Or the statement of Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel who said that it was well known “that there had been mass conversions, conversions by force, conversions by coercion and undue influence”.
After India attained freedom, a series of legislative measures ensured that religious conversions were “regulated”. The SC/ST communities lose their reservation and special status once they convert to another religion. The anti-conversion laws that different state governments have enacted serve to be a much harsher deterrent. Madhya Pradesh and Odisha were the first few states to enact such laws.
The issue of religious conversions is further complicated by the absence of a Uniform Civil Code. The moment a person converts, he or she is governed by a set of personal laws that may be uncodified or customary in nature. There is much debate and obscurity for formalities required for religious conversions in India.
The anti-conversion laws: Misplaced priorities
The new anti-conversion laws are ridden with serious problems. Anyone could be a complainant, disproportionate burden on the accused to disprove forceful conversions or presumption of marriage as an inducement to conversion, unless proven otherwise – all these facets of the new anti-conversion laws make them a tool for harassment.
The statute would fail to attain the objective that it had set out to achieve in the first place. Much like the Dowry Prohibition Act, which despite the best of intentions, failed to deliver on the social objective. With an overburdened faulty machinery, it is questionable to what extent legislations driven by social welfare can achieve their objectives.
The absence of empirical data or any study on religious conversions, no broad guidelines on the issue and obscurity over the formality required for conversions make the issue a breeding ground for political opportunism.
The present union government has taken a strong position on the issue of religious conversions in the political narrative but failed to constitute any proper study to collect empirical data. There has been a demand for a law at a national level on this issue, however the demand has not found the requisite political momentum.
The constituent assembly and religious conversions
The constituent assembly deliberated on the idea whether an anti-conversion clause should be included in the Constitution. It gave serious thought to ban religious conversions through fraudulent means, which included material inducements, using schools and hospitals to aid the process. After much debate and discussion, the issue was left to the legislature. Forcible religious conversions or conversions through inducements would not be permitted in independent India was obvious to the constitution makers.
The new anti-conversion laws, which emanated from the 1960s from different state governments, were not devoid of context. Instead, there is a constitutional history that has led to these laws. Any state government may decide to repeal or enact such laws, but the issue of religious conversions is not a modern creation.
In the absence of a national law, various divergences and anomalies are seen in the laws propagated by the states. Like in the case of Karnataka, the change of government may also lead to repeal of such laws.
Political immaturity and shrill communal overtones have made it impossible for us to have a reasoned discussion on religious conversions. The absence of national law and any empirical data only accentuates the absurdity.
Comments
0 comment